Viewpoint: An Open Letter To David Lloyd

David, you are an industry veteran who has been around the block since 1980.  You have so much experience and your books and blog are full of valuable insights that mostly are bang on the money.

But nobody bats a perfect innings, nobody hits the ball out of the park every time, and I'm afraid in your Open Letter To Tony Hall, you miss the mark by such a wide margin, that it's hard to believe that you actually spent a year in BBC Local Radio.  I feel I shouldn't have to be explaining what I'm about to say to you, but here goes.

This is a new time for BBC Local Radio, and indeed for all media.  Now more than ever before in the broadcasting world, broadcasters need to work as though they are working for multimedia operations, because the reality is, they are.

Back in the early days of the internet, a radio station's website or a TV station's website, could be like a shop window, giving people a flavour of what the radio station or TV channel could provide, if you chose to listen or watch.  

Nowadays, the online shop window concept seems about as archaic as silent movies, a style of movies that I love and adore, yet are so associated with the early days of Hollywood and film making.

Radio and TV broadcaster websites these days have to be another platform, for the broadcaster.  Online broadcasting for radio is now commonplace, and few radio stations worldwide don't actually have some form of online relay of their signal, or in some cases, an online-only schedule that allows them to have content going out online whilst live sports content that they don't have online rights for goes out over the airwaves.

How often do you hear on jingles these days something like, On FM, online and on your mobile?  Online broadcasting allows for greater reach, and through mobile apps like BBC iPlayer Radio, Tune In, RadioPlayer and others, as long as you are in range of mobile signal, you can listen to any station you choose, from just about anywhere in the world.

Of course, the text side of the equation is still there, and many radio stations are using the resources that are available to them, on their website to provide local news and information, plus taking national and international news and sport from Sky News or some other national provider.

And now, social media is added to the mix.  And this is where things get interesting.

Your own words David...

"...A radio station cannot target everyone. Radio One would be less successful were it targeted at everyone, and so would Radio Two. It does not work. You will create a radio network which is expensively-producing valuable output, consumed by ever fewer people..."

This is where you are wrong, David.  These days, a radio station can target everyone, but in different ways.

Social media is about the younger demographic, they get their news these days mostly from social media and the internet.  Radio is becoming an older demographic thing generally.  People gravitate onto radio usually through online listening these days, alongside their surfing and web browsing.

And here's another time you made the same point in the article...

"...You suggest moving from a 50+ target. The BBC appears to believe it is appropriate to require a Radio 1 to target young - but not for any one of your services necessarily to trouble with those of us over fifty - radio’s most avid consumers. Not only a puzzling decision, but irresponsible. Commercial radio cannot target 50+ given it is simply not economically viable . You have just announced that BBC radio should no longer charge itself with the interests of those over fifty. Can that be right?"

Okay, two big problems here.  First, commercial radio cannot target 50+ due to lack of economic viability?  How come channels like Gold and Smooth, and the Bauer City 2 stations, and My Music Radio and Encore and Classic FM all do so well.  Most of the demographic targets of those stations are 35-64 year olds, which means according to you that half the target audience of these stations is untargetable.

And as for the fact that BBC national services don't target the over 50s, I would suggest that BBC Radio 2, BBC Radio 3, BBC Radio 4, BBC Radio 4 Extra and BBC World Service all to some degree target the over 50s audience and do fairly well in that demo. 

Heck, I'm aware of commercial stations picking up audiences way older than their demographic targetting, because the person likes what they hear.  

What the BBC is doing, is similar to what community radio has been doing for itself.  Defining the role for the station, rather than the demographic, which is at best, is imprecise, and at worst, an idea drowned under the weight of stereotypes that don't exist and nobody actually believes in.  Nobody actually matches the stereotypes, so forget about them.  And forget about demographics, they'll only lead you down the wrong path.

Instead, define what your station's role is.  Radio 1's role is to pioneer new music and new artists.  The community radio station I do programmes for, Source FM, has a role, to promote local music and local issues that are of interest to the audience in our area, which is generally more progressive than other parts of Cornwall, which are more conservative.  In 2016's Brexit referendum, the Truro and Falmouth constituency voted Remain by 54-46.  BBC Local Radio's role is also to provide coverage of local issues.  But it needs to do more than just that, it needs to carve out its own important role, and Tony Hall's speech actually suggested that he had a vision for what BBC Local Radio should be.

"...Firstly, I want us to be more creative; and more local. As I said, I’m going to restore responsibility and accountability for the evening schedule – giving it back to local editors. Next summer we’ll be ending the All England show. I understand why it came about, but it’s not local enough; and it limits creativity.

We’re going to help you change the music you play too – giving you playlists which reflect the diversity of our cities and our counties. I want that to happen – and your colleagues at Radio 2 are going to work with you to do that.

Secondly, we need to do more to celebrate the diversity of our communities
So, as and when I can, I’ll introduce a fund to help you do just that....

...And, finally, I want us to continue to invest in our digital future.  It’s something David Holdsworth has felt very strongly about too. Rightly so. We need the right kit. We’ve got some brilliant journalists working in local radio – and I’ve already seen some great innovation. But you simply don’t have the best mobile equipment. That’s going to change.

And it’s going to help our local editors – every one of you – to be more ambitious.

Over the next few months, we’ll be working out how you can produce, publish and take charge of all your digital content. Because I want to put you in control."



Now, do I agree with everything that he sets out in his vision?  Most of it, but whether I agree with it or not, is not the point.  The point is he's defining the broad strokes of BBC Local Radio's role in the future.  

 Now, a couple more points...

"...You announce that budgets are not being reduced. Frankly, Tony, this is appalling. In such demanding times, every media outlet in the country is making economies. As I have demonstrated with granular detail at the invitation of your executives,BBC local stations could be managed more efficiently on far less money with greater success. You are wasting licence fee payers’ cash. Whilst many people on local radio work their socks off producing great radio, just about every employee could point to many inefficiencies too, if invited. Local radio will always be expensive, and this short -term announcement simply places local radio irresponsibly in long term peril."

...The only point I agree with here is that BBC Local Radio could be managed more efficiently on far less money, although whether that would bring greater success is debateable.  But frankly, there is massive overspending in other areas outside local radio, and the BBC needs to look at that first.  They do need to change the way they produce local radio, but even then, the idea that you need to cut budgets on BBC local radio is preposterous.  It's losing them listeners, you have said so yourself.  Adjusting how programmes are done so that the budget can go further, sure, but don't cut any more and really, they should invest more in local radio.  

How local is Heart really?  Heart only provides 43 hours a week of local/regional programming.  The remaining 125 hours a week are networked.  Commercial radio is heading towards a mostly networked model, with weekday breakfast, weekday drivetime and weekend breakfast being the only parts of the schedule that are local.  Local News might be done throughout daytime, but that is minimal local content in network daytimes, which really shows up commercial radio's commitment to localness, little more than a tick box exercise to keep the regulator happy.

Meanwhile, BBC Local Radio is live and local for at least 14 hours a day Monday to Friday, 12 hours on Saturday and 13 hours on a Sunday.  That adds up to a total of 95 hours of local programming, with the rest either being shared regional programming, the network evening show, and 5 Live's Up All Night, which totals around 73 hours.  Which one were listeners more concerned about?  Heart's network invasion of daytime, or BBC local radio's network evening show?  The answer was BBC local radio's network evening show, despite the fact the evening slot had fewer people listening to that than were listening to Heart's Daytime output.  I think that says it all about how little people truly care about local commercial radio.  But the BBC's local output is held in far greater esteem.

You might think this is the wrong move from the BBC.  I think this is exactly the right kind of thing that the BBC should be doing more of.  More local radio, more regional TV.  Such a move would solidify the BBC's position in local and regional broadcasting, a position that right now seems to be built on quicksand.  Better, more stable foundations will make for a better BBC.